Thursday, June 21, 2007

Shorter NPR's Favorite WSJ Journalist*

"I don't understand why people think globalization's economic benefits accumulate only at the top. I guess Congress'll have to engage in a necessary evil and raise taxes to keep the unwashed masses happy. "

Translation: "Why are people so irrational according to what I learned in Econ 101 when Econ 101 also told me people are always rational? If I thought about that and the possibility that basing my commentary on Econ 101 level analysis would be the equivalent of commenting on the mysteries of 'friction' and anisotropic tumbling when in Physics 101 we learned that all cows rolling down hills are spherical and frictionless, my head would explode, so I guess I'll just repeat 'conventional wisdom' that, if accepted, will make my upper-class readership and bosses rich ... after all, they pay my bills and I know what side my bread is buttered on"

*Sadly, No! (IIRC) has the necessary references for the "shorter X" concept

On another subject, did everyone see the nuanced message of Carter's "we should have supported the Hamas govt" - that the Zionists are responsible for Hamas coup, b/c had we continued to give them aid(eventhough US continued to give aid to Gazans through private orgs) they wouldn't have had to resort to violent action.

In general, my belief is that since Hamas never sid it would recognize Israel if she returned to Pre-1967 borders, it is not a credible peace partner and deserves to be shunned.

I generally agree, if you'll pardon the Godwin's law violation, that just because a government is constituted following duly held elections, doesn't mean we should treat it as legitimate, c.f. Hitler in Germany.

That being said, I think that the Bush admin's diplomacy sucks. The message we're sending is "we say we want elections, but if you don't elect the people we want, we'll hold your arm until you change your mind". Instead, we should stop acting like what's happened in Gaza is a Hamas coup and ignoring the Fatah coup in the West Bank. We should call a spade a spade and then go from there.

Of course, our diplomatic efforts would be easier (and people would trust us more) if Bush & CO had notions of democracy and liberty other than those borrowed from the 18th century Southern gentry (excluding in this case Washington, Jefferson and Madison -- yes, I'm talking about you Patrick Henry). We'd insist on real notions of liberty to provide safeguards for a democracy that is established. We'd be more clear about our response to Hamas, etc.

But what do you expect from an admin hell bent on "exporting democracy" when their definition of democracy is, well, by any other sense, frankly un-democractic?